A letter from Ronald D. Moore and David Eick

Praetorian

I saw this letter on another Battlestar Galactica forum. The letter is to Americans and Canadians, but I believe the producers wouldn't mind me posting it here:

It's come to our attention that many of you out there are so eager to see our show that you've decided to jump the line and get the episodes via the internet ahead of everyone patiently waiting in the US and Canada for the show to premiere in January. First of all, we're flattered and happy that you're so excited to see the new season of Battlestar Galactica and appreciate the support. However, beyond the fact that getting episodes over the internet is illegal it's also potentially very damaging to the show itself. You see, we need RATINGS which means we need eyeballs in front of TV screens that advertisers can measure. The more episodes get downloaded and digitally copied and passed along and copied again and passed along and copied yet again and passed along yet again, it creates a dangerous situation where a lot of people are watching and enjoying Galactica, but not seeing it when it counts -- namely on the air.

Please understand that in order to get picked up for a second season, we need good ratings in January, not silent, uncounted viewing in November. The more you copy the show and pass it along to your friends now, the more it potentially impacts our total audience in January. So while we admire your resourcefulness and appreciate your appetite for Galactica, we implore you to please refrain from downloading the episodes or sharing them in any way.

Thank you.
Ronald D. Moore & David Eick
Executive Producers

ixoy

Thankfully, for once, we're not downloading as we get it first

It's important to remember, if a bit wrong, that the only people who really need to watch it are the Nielsen families, comprising about .01% of the US population. As long as they, and they alone, watch it doesn't matter really what others do!

doh.ie

Would you believe it's actually *less* than .01?!

Nielsen measure about 13,000 people (5,000 homes) out of a population
of 293m, which is about 0.0044%!

As a percentage of people watching TV (something like 90m homes), this is
something like 0.05%, but still infinitesimal.

In any case, while I do understand Moore and Eick's concerns about the downloads, I reckon it would only take about one or two people watching on Nielsen boxes for the show to register as a smash hit! Problem with the US is there are so many channels there, it's really all down to effective promotion and marketing of a series before its launch.

I can't help thinking the UK and Irish Nielsens are measured much more accurately - much larger sample to population ratio.

Ixoy's right - this will make little or no difference to the US ratings unless a few savvy Nielsen households download and don't bother to watch. But I'd like to think that if someone cared enough about a particular show to download it, they'd also make a point of making sure the TV was tuned to it on the night. (Of course, Moore & Eick probably also want people generally to tune in just so they can have Sci-Fi Channel and its other programmes marketed to them...)

Praetorian - do you know from the original forum what the general response to the producers' posting was?

irishman_abroad

Any real need to have this as a sticky??

Praetorian

irishman_abroad wrote:

Any real need to have this as a sticky??

I'll unsticky it in a while!

doe.ie wrote:

do you know from the original forum what the general response to the producers' posting was?

The thread was closed so nobody could respond.

irishman_abroad

Reaction from http://www.galactica2003.net/


Yes, It Might Be Illegal, But Is It Bad? SyFyPortal There is a great thing about living in the United States. For some reason, we're considered the center of the entertainment universe. If something is going to survive, it's going to survive because Americans (and Canadians) like it.

Sure, there are shows made in other countries that solely depend on their regional audiences ... but overall, a lot of what you see on television is filmed in the United States and Canada.

Being in the center of that universe, most of us are used to being able to watch everything before everyone else. We get certain movies first, almost every series first, and we can chuckle as our European friends have to sit back and wonder when they'll be able to watch what we're watching.

But all that changed last month when the new NBC Universal series "Battlestar Galactica" made its debut on Sky One. Despite being filmed in Canada, and being produced by an American company, a deal between NBC Universal and Sky One allowed the show to premiere on the United Kingdom's satellite channel nearly three months before it would make its debut on the Sci-Fi Channel in the United States, and on Space in Canada.

Wow ... what were American fans going to do? Well, network and show executives would want you to wait, and a vast majority of the show's potential audience is going to do just that. But there are a small handful -- maybe around 50,000 or so -- who prefer not to wait, and are going to use their technical savvy to enjoy a series that Europeans already are enjoying.

It's a system similar to what Napster and others were brought down for in the music industry, called "peer to peer." Someone makes a digital copy of a television show, and then they make it available at different sites for people to come in and download. The quality can vary from very good, to pretty average.

This is something that Brits and Europeans (as well as people in other parts of the world) have been doing for a long time. Even with satellite providers pushing past terrestrial channels, the wait many times for those overseas to see American shows like "CSI," like "Alias," like "Smallville," like "Star Trek: Enterprise" can be months to more than a year. And yes, many people there wait for it to come on, while a bunch would prefer to download episodes from the Internet.

But does it really make a difference in the ratings? Take a look at some recent Sky One figures. "Stargate SG-1" was the No. 2 show with 920,000 viewers, or a 23 share of the market. "Stargate: Atlantis" was the No. 4 show with 860,000 viewers, or about a 21 share. "Malcolm in the Middle" was No. 8 with 800,000 viewers, or about a 20 share. All of these shows, which have been available to U.K. audiences through peer to peer systems since last summer, still finished strongly in their first runs on the satellite provider. All of them also finished ahead of "Battlestar Galactica," which was not available to these viewers ahead of time.

Now, please understand. Brits and other Europeans have been aware of peer-to-peer technology for years, and have made the system pretty popular in obtaining American shows. Americans, who normally don't need to download episodes on a regular basis because they get them first anyway, aren't that savvy with it. Yet, with the popularity of peer to peer, shows that have been available for months still end up with strong ratings on the satellite providers. Could those numbers have been stronger without peer to peer? Possibly, but at a level so small, no one would notice.

I totally get that downloading episodes is considered illegal, especially if you pull it in from a peer-to-peer provider. These episodes are missing commercials that helped pay for the broadcast of the episode, and no one is receiving royalties for the additional views of this program. But at the samt time, it is ludicrous for "Galactica" executive producers Ronald D. Moore and David Eick to claim that peer-to-peer distribution of their series is going to have such a tremendous negative impact on ratings, that it could cost the show a second-season renewal.

Sorry, as much respect as I have for Moore and Eick, I just cannot buy that. If the 50,000 figure is accurate -- and as far as I know, that could be an inflated figure -- that's barely within the margin of error of Nielsen ratings for basic cable television shows. Even if these 50,000 people decided not to watch the show when it makes its debut on this continent in January, your figures would be like 3.21 million watching rather than 3.26 million. Yeah, that's two decimal points in ... and even if you rounded it, it's a difference between 3.3 million and 3.2 million. If Sci-Fi Channel holds their line of cancellation that close, then there's something wrong with Sci-Fi Channel's management.

You can't blame Moore or Eick, however. They are simply the men who are bringing this show to us. They are not the ones that hammer out the distribution deals, or the ones who bring in the financial backers. That's NBC Universal's job. Whether this deal was struck under Vivendi, or under NBC Universal, this is a deal that the company would have to live with. They would have to realize that by releasing it overseas first, it could undermine the very ratings they are trying to get here.

I mean, seriously ... do you think that Fox is about to put "Malcolm in the Middle" on the chopping block because it's only getting 800,000 viewers on a satellite channel in Europe? No. Its fate depends on how well it does in the American market, where the advertising dollars are. Even if "Malcolm" aired in the U.K. first, I still don't see it having anything more than a minimal impact on American ratings.

Instead of bitching and moaning about piracy, movie studios have decided to be a little more smart with their distribution efforts. Make motion picture releases a little more global, when possible. If there is going to be a lot of piracy -- like what was expected with "The Matrix" sequels -- make it available at the same time in as many markets as possible.

It's not hard to do that for television. If you have to air it in the U.K. a couple weeks ahead of time, that's fine ... I'm sure that even the most impatient fans can wait a couple weeks. But ask them to wait several months? Hmmm ... that's stretching it a bit.

And remember, these are not small files. Peer-to-peer users typically see something like 400-meg files to download. Even with high-speed connections (that are both expensive, and not as common as dial-up or DSL), downloads like that could still take at least two hours. It's a lot of work, and unless it gets faster and easier, I doubt that this will take off on a mass scale anytime soon.

And, this is something that could backfire. Not a lot of people are aware that television episodes are made available through peer to peer. It does require a little bit of technical savvy to pick it up ... but by making a big deal about it, you publicize it. Some people will be scratching their heads, and wondering what Moore and Eick are talking about. And then they will find out what it is, and may find that they want to do it, too.

I say that with 50,000 people viewing your episodes ahead of time ... treat it like a sneak preview of a movie. Back in 1996, I was offered a chance as a moviegoer to see a sneak preview of a film that was rumored to be on its way to becoming the biggest box-office bomb in history. I almost didn't go, as I knew these sneak previews were taking place all over the country ... but I did go.

I'm glad I went. I loved the movie tremendously, and then went about telling all my friends about it two weeks before it made its debut. People who probably wouldn't have given the film a chance on its opening weekend decided to do it. And I know others who left those sneak previews did the same.

And, believe it or not, that movie ended up going from a ton of negative publicity, to actually making a small profit. You might have heard of the movie ... it was a piece from James Cameron called "Titanic."

Fenster

I came accross this tonight. If it scored 4.2m viewers and has had massive popularity since then after being shown on a "niche" channel such as Sci-Fi, think what it will draw in on a mainstream channel, especially at primetime.

Incidently, have Sky released any ratings yet of the current Galactica run?

ixoy

Fenster wrote:

Incidently, have Sky released any ratings yet of the current Galactica run?

The Sunday Times' Culture section contains the Top 10 ratings for Satellite TV. So far, every week, Battlestar Galactica has featured between 6th and 8th position. I can't recall the number of viewers (I think it was roughly about .65-.75 million) but its position, overall, is very good. The only thing beating it are a couple of football matches, the Simpsons, Stargate, and Most Haunted on Living TV.

c0y0te

Pity there isn't an internet voting option for these shows.

The Irish are great at internet polls ... we never loose!

c0y0te

Praetorian

c0y0te wrote:

Pity there isn't an internet voting option for these shows.

The Irish are great at internet polls ... we never loose!

c0y0te

Very true!

TCamen

Most Haunted on Living TV.

Urgh, I hate that show!! :mad:

Dream Team on Sky One only averages approx. 500,000 viewers each week (550,000 for the season premiere), so I'd say Galactica is in pretty good shape @ 650,000+.

Stark

Ixoy's right - this will make little or no difference to the US ratings unless a few savvy Nielsen households download and don't bother to watch. But I'd like to think that if someone cared enough about a particular show to download it, they'd also make a point of making sure the TV was tuned to it on the night.

The problem isn't with the hardcore fans downloading as we know they'll watch it anyway when it comes on TV again. The problem is when copies get distributed to friends of friends of friends, so that many copies fall into the hands of many casual fewers (some of whom have nielsens) and you have no control over whether or not these people tune in (and from my experience with "casuals" from various walks of life, there's a 95% chance they won't).